[Tom's Hardware] Sandy Bridge-E and X79 Platform Preview

[Edrick]

:hmm:

Then why couldn't they test overclocking properly with an LGA 1366 cooler? I'm sure they'd have one around.

If it does have the same mounting support, it's the same story as 1156 and 1155.

I said the dimentions are the same. But from looking at pictures, it appears that there is a metal plate that encompases the entire CPU area under the cooler on s2011 MBs. (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4404/computex-2011-twelve-x79-motherboards)

So this differs from s1366. And I would guess that any pushpin type coolers would not be long enough to go all the way through. So perhaps we would need longer screws or a different backplate for s1366 coolers to fit.

This is all my guess though. All I know, from what I read, is that the dimentions are the same.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I said the dimentions are the same. But from looking at pictures, it appears that there is a metal plate that encompases the entire CPU area under the cooler on s2011 MBs. (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4404/computex-2011-twelve-x79-motherboards)

So this differs from s1366. And I would guess that any pushpin type coolers would not be long enough to go all the way through. So perhaps we would need longer screws or a different backplate for s1366 coolers to fit.

This is all my guess though. All I know, from what I read, is that the dimentions are the same.

Oh. Power consumption should be lower than Gulftown, though, which is a relief for most overclockers.

 

[AdamK47]

I have another question I'll just throw out here for anyone to answer. I have three GTX 580s and an Asus Xonar Essence STX sound card.

Lets say I have this motherboard:

http://images.anandtech.com/galleries/1117/MSI%20X79A-GD80.jpg

I place the Xonar in the top PCI-E 1X slot and the three GTX 580s in PCIE-E 16X slots 1, 2, and 3. What PCI-E speeds will each card run at?


Lets say I have this motherboard:

http://images.anandtech.com/galleries/1117/Sapphire PB-C17X79N.jpg

I place the Xonar in the 1st slot, the first 580 in the 2nd slot, the second 580 in the 4th slot, and the third 580 in the 6th slot. What PCI-E speeds will each card run at?

It's a funny puzzler.

 

[Edrick]

Lets say I have this motherboard: http://images.anandtech.com/gallerie...0X79A-GD80.jpg I place the Xonar in the top PCI-E 1X slot and the three GTX 580s in PCIE-E 16X slots 1, 2, and 3. What PCI-E speeds will each card run at?

GTX 580s will run at 8x, 8x, 8x and the Xonar will be 1x. That assumes there is 32+ lanes of PCIe on the die. If we get 40, as some suggest, then you could do a 16x, 16x, 8x. But not sure of that would even help.

Lets say I have this motherboard: http://images.anandtech.com/gallerie...PB-C17X79N.jpg I place the Xonar in the 1st slot, the first 580 in the 2nd slot, the second 580 in the 4th slot, and the third 580 in the 6th slot. What PCI-E speeds will each card run at?

This one is tricky. If all slots tie into the PCIe lanes on the CPU, then you are limited. If 1 or 2 of those slots tie into the 8 PCIe lanes of the x79 chip, then you have more options. So with all slots connected to the CPU, then all 4 cards (including sound) would be running at 8x. Although the sound card would only be using 1 of the 8 available.

 

[AdamK47]

GTX 580s will run at 8x, 8x, 8x and the Xonar will be 1x. That assumes there is 32+ lanes of PCIe on the die. If we get 40, as some suggest, then you could do a 16x, 16x, 8x. But not sure of that would even help.

The article states the following:

As with desktop Sandy Bridge, Sandy Bridge-E handles PCI Express control. Instead of a paltry 16 lanes of second-gen connectivity, though, we get 40 lanes. Those lanes can be divided up into two x16 links and one x8 link, one x16 link and three x8 links, or one x16 link, two x8 links, and two x4 links.

My current X58 motherboard (Asus P6X58D Premium) has a similar layout and runs the Xonar at 1x (obviously) and the 580s at 16x/8x/8x.

This one is tricky. If all slots tie into the PCIe lanes on the CPU, then you are limited. If 1 or 2 of those slots tie into the 8 PCIe lanes of the x79 chip, then you have more options. So with all slots connected to the CPU, then all 4 cards (including sound) would be running at 8x. Although the sound card would only be using 1 of the 8 available.

With 40 lanes, couldn't the 580s still run at 16/8/8 with the Xonar in the top slot?

 

[AdamK47]

Also, in the first motherboard, wouldn't the PCI-E 1x slot go through the PCI-E DMI link?

This would allow the cards to run 16x/16x/8x.

 

[Edrick]

With 40 lanes, couldn't the 580s still run at 16/8/8 with the Xonar in the top slot?

When doing SLI, is there any gain to having one card on x16 while the others are only on 8x? I would have thought you would want them all going the same speed to avoid any bottlenecks.

 

[Edrick]

Also, in the first motherboard, wouldn't the PCI-E 1x slot go through the PCI-E DMI link?

Yes. So that would avoid you having to use CPU lanes for your Xonar.

I personally do not like the MBs with just x16 slots. I use 2 cards which use 1x PCIe (sound and network), and I do not want them using CPU lanes for this. I find the MBs with dedicated 1x slots much easier to manage.

 

[AtenRa]

First, PCI-e slots on the motherboard are connected to the CPU lanes, the 8 PCI-E lanes in the X79 are for connecting external controllers like NEC USB-3 etc.

On the following motherboard (http://images.anandtech.com/galleries/1117/Sapphire PB-C17X79N.jpg) each PCI-E slot doesnt connect with the same number of lanes to the CPU.

Slot number 1 could have 16 lanes and slot number 2 could have 8 lanes, slot number 3 could have 4 and slot number 4 could have 8 lanes etc.
So you have to know how many lanes each PCI-E slot has in order to use 16,8,8 again

Image from my ASUS Crosshair IV Formula

 

[HendrixFan]

If you're gonna go SB-E you should go straight for the Six-Cores. Ivy Bridge is supposed to have up to Quad-Cores only, unfortunately.

I thought you were all about price/performance? I'm sure there are people out there who don't yet need more than four cores but would like the option of upgrading to six or even eight down the road as more software becomes multithreaded. 1366 has had a good three year run, and if 2011 is similar in longevity it would make sense to future proof with it.

As a side note, I found it odd that Toms ran a LAME encode that was single threaded but didn't include the multithreaded version too. I've been busy converting my FLACs to MP3s (with LAME) the last week or two, as I upload to Google Music. I have HT enabled, and all "eight" of my cores get maxed at 100% during the encoding.

 

[Edrick]

First, PCI-e slots on the motherboard are connected to the CPU lanes, the 8 PCI-E lanes in the X79 are for connecting external controllers like NEC USB-3 etc.

Where did you read that? In fact, I know you are incorrect. In my system alone, my GTX570 is running at x16. Yet I have 2 x1 cards also in my system. And since my CPU only has 16 lanes, simple math says that the other x1 slots are pulling from the P67 chipset (8 lanes) and not the CPU.

 

[AtenRa]

Where did you read that? In fact, I know you are incorrect. In my system alone, my GTX570 is running at x16. Yet I have 2 x1 cards also in my system. And since my CPU only has 16 lanes, simple math says that the other x1 slots are pulling from the P67 chipset (8 lanes) and not the CPU.

ehm yes you are correct, I was thinking about the 16x slots.

Usually, Chipset lanes are used for connecting external controllers (USB-3, SATA 6 etc) and for 1x or 4x PCI-e slots.

 

[dangerman1337]

With PCI-E 3.0, other fancy stuff and disappointing performance from the looks of it I wonder what was the entire point if it isn't much a boost. They should just go back to a single socket for consumers like LGA 775 for Haswell.

At this point the whole chip producing industry has gone done the gutter lately. Bulldozer looks like another Phenom, 28nm GPUs are who knows where with the next shrink (20nm) for GPUs probably likely being summer 2014.

 

[aigomorla]

Also, in the first motherboard, wouldn't the PCI-E 1x slot go through the PCI-E DMI link?

This would allow the cards to run 16x/16x/8x.

means u need a NF200 controller for 3x+ - 16x lanes

First, PCI-e slots on the motherboard are connected to the CPU lanes, the 8 PCI-E lanes in the X79 are for connecting external controllers like NEC USB-3 etc.

On the following motherboard (http://images.anandtech.com/galleries/1117/Sapphire%20PB-C17X79N.jpg) each PCI-E slot doesnt connect with the same number of lanes to the CPU.

Slot number 1 could have 16 lanes and slot number 2 could have 8 lanes, slot number 3 could have 4 and slot number 4 could have 8 lanes etc.
So you have to know how many lanes each PCI-E slot has in order to use 16,8,8 again

Image from my ASUS Crosshair IV Formula

no they wont do that... not on the TOP platform.. unless it was budget orientated.

They are going to put a NF200 controller chip next to the South Bridge like my classy 759, and the 4way classy.
So you get all your pretty red slots being 16x.

Unless u get a GIMP'd X79.

 

[AdamK47]

Looks like the MSI X79A-GD80 has exactly the layout I need. The max configuration with thee cards in SLI on an X58 board is 16x/8x/8x. With X79 I'll be able to do 16x/16x/8x. I guess that's something, however small the gain might be.

 

[aigomorla]

Looks like the MSI X79A-GD80 has exactly the layout I need. The max configuration with thee cards in SLI on an X58 board is 16x/8x/8x. With X79 I'll be able to do 16x/16x/8x. I guess that's something, however small the gain might be.

no... wait for the EATX boards to roll in Adam... u know what infact just WAIT in general dammit.

Trust me... your not going to miss 2011 when your on a 980X.

Go overkill on SSD's... thats my 2 cents... that way, when we get out of this bubble, u can migrate SOMETHING.... Or stack up on 30's.. get 3 on eyefinity or stereoscopic 3d so i can truely HATE you from the bottom of my heart.

cuz i know lately you must be like me.. and having to replace EVERYTHING because EVERYTHING got outdated..

 

[RussianSensation]

With PCI-E 3.0, other fancy stuff and disappointing performance from the looks of it I wonder what was the entire point if it isn't much a boost. They should just go back to a single socket for consumers like LGA 775 for Haswell.

At this point the whole chip producing industry has gone done the gutter lately. Bulldozer looks like another Phenom, 28nm GPUs are who knows where with the next shrink (20nm) for GPUs probably likely being summer 2014.

There hasn't been a lot of point to spend hundreds of dollars on new parts as was in the case in 1995 to 2007 era. After PS3 and Xbox360, we really entered the stage of consolization.

Most of the major PC games coming out are all going to be available on consoles:

1. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
2. Assassin's Creed: Revelations
3. Battlefield 3
4. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
5. Rage
6. Batman: Arkham City

Not to mention Crysis 2, BF2, Metro 2033, Dragon Age I/II, Dirt 2/3, F1 2010, etc. etc.

Most PC exclusives are strategy and role-playing games now (Diablo 3, WoW, Starcraft 2, Civ5, Shogun 2). PC upgrading now is more of a hobby than ever. Upgrading is now more about fun. You can still get 3x 2560x1600 displays and crank 8AA on those. So there is still is a way to justify spending $1500 on GPUs.

As much as people hated the ability of Crysis to punish hardware, it also set a benchmark and a goal for many to conquer. Most importantly, it was a true PC exclusive. Before that, Quake & Unreal games, Doom 3, Far Cry kept setting benchmarks to reach for years to come. Now, there isn't 1 game that WOWs as much and makes you really wish for a much more powerful graphics card upgrade (at least that's how I feel).

 

[aigomorla]

You can still get 3x 2560x1600 displays and crank 8AA on those. So there is still is a way to justify spending $1500 on GPUs.

that is one way to get me to truely hate you from the bottom of my endless jealous heart.... :thumbsup:

however 1500 dollars in gpu still doesnt justify 6000 dollars in monitors.


I wonder out of curiosity how many of us are even running video cards which are CHEAPER then the monitor its powering on your main system.

because if i skip my servers which are all onboard or cheapo video... none of my systems have a monitor which was more expensive then my video card in a 1:1 ratio.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I thought you were all about price/performance? I'm sure there are people out there who don't yet need more than four cores but would like the option of upgrading to six or even eight down the road as more software becomes multithreaded. 1366 has had a good three year run, and if 2011 is similar in longevity it would make sense to future proof with it.

As a side note, I found it odd that Toms ran a LAME encode that was single threaded but didn't include the multithreaded version too. I've been busy converting my FLACs to MP3s (with LAME) the last week or two, as I upload to Google Music. I have HT enabled, and all "eight" of my cores get maxed at 100% during the encoding.

I am. But the reality is that the Quad-Core chips aren't fast enough for some people when doing heavy encoding and rendering, especially if they do it frequently. If your work depends on it, time is money too. The 3930K at $600 isn't bad for those people, though obviously we get to a point of diminishing returns, as we always do going from the Performance to Enthusiast market.

The LAME test isn't run on multi-threaded mode because it's used to represent single-threaded performance. iTunes isn't used as a reference point because while it's not made to take advantage of multiple threads, it is compiled to take advantage of Intel's CPUs. Kinda like SuperPi.

 

[AdamK47]

no... wait for the EATX boards to roll in Adam... u know what infact just WAIT in general dammit.

Trust me... your not going to miss 2011 when your on a 980X.

Go overkill on SSD's... thats my 2 cents... that way, when we get out of this bubble, u can migrate SOMETHING.... Or stack up on 30's.. get 3 on eyefinity or stereoscopic 3d so i can truely HATE you from the bottom of my heart.

cuz i know lately you must be like me.. and having to replace EVERYTHING because EVERYTHING got outdated..

I've been waiting for 8 months for socket 2011. Waiting longer while knowing it's available would be torture... unless you know something I should know.

 

[grimpr]

As much as people hated the ability of Crysis to punish hardware, it also set a benchmark and a goal for many to conquer. Most importantly, it was a true PC exclusive. Before that, Quake & Unreal games, Doom 3, Far Cry kept setting benchmarks to reach for years to come. Now, there isn't 1 game that WOWs as much and makes you really wish for a much more powerful graphics card upgrade (at least that's how I feel).

:thumbsup:

I hated it at first and then realised that this alltime pc classic supercharged the whole diy pc scene, the gpu wars and the second hand market, god bless its memory...we desperatley need more Crysis like titles and total pc exclusives per 2 years for this hobby not to die out.

 

[PreferLinux]

that is one way to get me to truely hate you from the bottom of my endless jealous heart.... :thumbsup:

however 1500 dollars in gpu still doesnt justify 6000 dollars in monitors.


I wonder out of curiosity how many of us are even running video cards which are CHEAPER then the monitor its powering on your main system.

because if i skip my servers which are all onboard or cheapo video... none of my systems have a monitor which was more expensive then my video card in a 1:1 ratio.

Me, although I probably don't count! A 210 powering a Dell 2311H, and a 8400GS powering a Philips 170B6 and a Philips 150B4.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I wonder out of curiosity how many of us are even running video cards which are CHEAPER then the monitor its powering on your main system.

because if i skip my servers which are all onboard or cheapo video... none of my systems have a monitor which was more expensive then my video card in a 1:1 ratio.

My GTX580 was about $380 refurbed and my BenQ XL2410T was about $425 new, and I paid ~$900 for my Dell U2711 and only about $250 each for the pair of GTX470s that I ran back before the 580 to power the U2711 before it was bumped down to a secondary monitor once I got the XL2410T.

I don't like spending a lot of money on my computer hardware only to skimp on the interface peripherals that actually allow me to interact with that hardware

I would love to go to a surround monitor setup but cannot accept the inherent input lag that would come at the cost of running multiple GPUs required to power such a setup (which was a major reason why I jumped from dual 470s to a single 580 as well as going to a smaller monitor with less image quality in order to obtain faster response and superior motion clarity)

 

[AdamK47]

My GTX580 was about $380 refurbed and my BenQ XL2410T was about $425 new, and I paid ~$900 for my Dell U2711 and only about $250 each for the pair of GTX470s that I ran back before the 580 to power the U2711 before it was bumped down to a secondary monitor once I got the XL2410T.

I don't like spending a lot of money on my computer hardware only to skimp on the interface peripherals that actually allow me to interact with that hardware

I would love to go to a surround monitor setup but cannot accept the inherent input lag that would come at the cost of running multiple GPUs required to power such a setup (which was a major reason why I jumped from dual 470s to a single 580 as well as going to a smaller monitor with less image quality in order to obtain faster response and superior motion clarity)

There really isn't much in the way of input lag with an nVidia SLI setup. nVidia's AFR/AFR2 methods are very quick with almost zero input lag. SFR is where you'll notice input lag.

 

[max347]

+1 for bring on the next crysis.

It really sucks being able to max out the newest games with last gen tech....means I don't have a valid reason to upgrade

I guess with 3D/eyefinity, thats one reason, but I am really looking forward to ultra realistic games that push the gpu market again